[ SECRET POST #6129 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6129 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.


























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 20 secrets from Secret Submission Post #876.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

06. https://i.imgur.com/ctoaTLq.png

[feotakahari]

Yeah, but your idea of what constitutes quality media isn’t necessarily my idea of what constitutes quality media, either. Like the argument that Star Wars is bad because the monomyth requires confronting the father before rescuing the princess, not after.

[(Anonymous)]

Sure. But I also think what counts as "good" vs. "bad" writing is at least partially subjective.

[rosehiptea]

I definitely agree with people saying it’s still subjective. But I think this is related to the way some fans like to read subtle meaning into something that isn’t actually that deep. Which is OK and can be fun, but it’s good to remember that (general) you may be reading into things and it’s OK if other people don’t see it/don’t like your favorite thing.

[wpadmirer]

I totally get this. It's like China Mieville for me. He's a fantastic writer. Brilliant. I really dislike his books. I can never find a character I like. But I would never say he's a bad writer - because it's simply not true.

His work doesn't appeal to me.

This is true of any art form.

[(Anonymous)]

Yes, this. I did not enjoy Casablanca one bit but I recognize that it was objectively an excellent movie for multiple reasons. It just wasn't a movie for me.

[(Anonymous)]

Yes, just because someone likes something, that doesn't necessarily mean that something is good. But then we have to get into what actually constitutes good and bad in something that has both objective and subjective qualities - yes, there are some parts that can be judged technically sound or not, but there are other parts that have a lot more ambiguity. Art is like that. And if you are talking about the subjective parts, then who gets the final say whether something is good or bad?

[(Anonymous)]

Why is it bad if something isn't good, though? I like plenty of media that I would not say is "good" by any stretch of the word, but it was still enjoyable to me and that's what matters.

[(Anonymous)]

aryt

It's not, but that's not the issue in the secret, as I understood it. And my comment is about if someone thinks something is good and someone else thinks that something is bad, and if they are judging that thing on subjective measures, who's right? Because the secret seems to imply that there is some wholly objective scale for media quality out there and I don't think there is.

[meadowphoenix]

I don't really care about this distinction until it spills over into actual conflict. I think it's fine that people think stuff that didn't hit them the way they wanted is bad or vice versa, until they start trying to convince other people (mostly because this ship sailed when art began like....). What I like is good and what I don't like is bad is a standard, and therefore a valid one. It's just not transferable or broadly applicable in any way.

However, I'm not a fan of actual critics who write reviews or even recaps for a living doing this and claiming objectivity. That's annoying and not very useful. I think critics should be more clear about their biases and expectations and release objectivity to the wind.

[(Anonymous)]

Heh I get this too well. All of my recent favorite book series are poorly written but so damn entertaining! I’m very subjective about media; if I like it, then I like it. If I don’t, then I don’t *shrug*

[(Anonymous)]

Nope, nothing someone loves can be universally objectively bad. If there's something about it that causes a degree of investment in it that amounts to "love," that itself is a marker of objective good quality. Calling something you love bad means you seek the approval of people who don't respect your opinions.

[(Anonymous)]

I figure it's because they know nothing about writing and acting, but saying something about the 'writing' or 'acting' sounds intellectual and gives credence to what is in fact just their personal feeling about it. I agree; it's so annoying. I have so much more respect for someone who accurately credits what a show does well, and then acknowledges which of their perceptions are merely personal feelings.